[GA - AT VOTE - FOR] Repeal "International Criminal Protocol"

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-

Repeal: "International Criminal Protocol"
Category: Repeal | GA #500
Proposed by: Greater Cesnica | Onsite Topic
Replacement: International Criminal Protocol


General Assembly Resolution #500 “International Criminal Protocol” (Category: Civil Rights; Strength: Strong) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

The General Assembly,

Applauding GA #500 "International Criminal Protocol" for its intended goal, which was ostensibly to preserve the civil liberties of those imprisoned from the horrors of state-sanctioned legal abuses,

Reassuring member states that a replacement resolution has been drafted to carry on the vital protections GA #500 offered concerning prison conditions,

Dismayed, however, that the resolution permits member states to decide the legality of capital punishment; a state-sanctioned penalty that this Assembly regards as inherently abhorrent and as posing a devastating detriment to civil liberties,

Cognizant that many ambassadors were unaware of the resolution’s toleration of the death penalty at the time of its passage, perhaps because of its focus on the rights of prisoners,

Referring to the fact that this body has previously repealed otherwise well-meaning resolutions on such grounds (see also GA#438 Repeal: “Crime And Punishment”),

In particular, it must be noted that:

  • The death penalty is always inconsistent with the inherent dignity of the person,
  • The costs of the administrative effort necessary to fully prove the guilt of the convicted almost always outweighs any of its possible financial benefits,
  • The presumption that the death penalty lowers violent crime rates is based on the empirically false assumption that the circumstances of violent crime can be considered in a vacuum where criminals act rationally,
  • The death penalty rarely aids the family of homicide victims, as it merely adds the emotional baggage of yet another life lost, and
  • The use of such a severe, irreversible penalty can further exacerbate disparities in justice systems, especially those with existing widespread discrimination,
Further noting that since the justifications presented for the use of the death penalty are insufficient to allow member states to legalize it, this esteemed Assembly ought to prohibit it - which cannot occur in the presence of the target resolution,

Appalled that this resolution stands in the way of preventing the execution of innocent persons for crimes they did not commit, an atrocity that will continue to occur so as long as this resolution remains in force,

Resolved that the numerous benefits and protections this resolution brings forth does not outweigh the crippling blow it inflicts upon civil liberties, a disservice to the good intentions that fostered it,

Hereby repeals GA #500 "International Criminal Protocol".

Co-authored by Pope Saint Peter the Apostle and Tinhampton.
Note: Only votes from TNP WA nations and NPA personnel will be counted. If you do not meet these requirements, please add (non-WA) or something of that effect to your vote.
Voting Instructions:
  • Vote For if you want the Delegate to vote For the resolution.
  • Vote Against if you want the Delegate to vote Against the resolution.
  • Vote Abstain if you want the Delegate to abstain from voting on this resolution.
  • Vote Present if you are personally abstaining from this vote.
Detailed opinions with your vote are appreciated and encouraged!

For Against Abstain Present
9801
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-
IFV:
Overview
'Repeal: "International Criminal Protocol"' is a resolution that seeks to repeal GA#500 "International Criminal Protocol" for preventing the World Assembly from banning the execution of prisoners. It argues that the resolution ought to be replaced by a proposal that similarly protects civil liberties, without blocking the WA from banning capital punishment.

Recommendation
The Ministry of WA Affairs opposed the target when it was submitted to the WA, calling it a "wolf in sheep's clothing". The Ministry continues to be saddened by the blocker the resolution presents. Capital punishment is unacceptable in a tolerant and just society. Any supposed practical benefits never actually materialise, and still, nothing justifies killing a person. The WA previously repealed legislation because it blocked a ban on capital punishment, and it should do so again. The resolution's laudable effort to protect prisoners can be served by a replacement resolution that doesn't contain a blocker. For these reasons, the Ministry of World Assembly Affairs recommends voting For the at-vote General Assembly proposal, 'Repeal: "International Criminal Protocol"'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Greater Cesnica

Registered
Last edited:

Boston Castle

Kaleidoscope King
-
-
Also, there are two replacement resolution drafts that I'd like to mention:

"Fair Treatment of Prisoners" is a draft by me that concerns prison conditions, and "Convention on Abolishing All Forms of Unfair Punishment" (CoAUP) is a draft by Tinhampton that seeks to prohibit capital punishment and other cruel and unusual forms of punishment. Both of these resolutions are intended to be brought to the floor after the passage of our repeal.
For the moment, I just went with the one that's being drafted by Tinfect. Not too worried about getting that part exactly right.
 

Fregerson

Secretly here
-
-
-
Present. For the longest of times, I have withheld my personal opinions on this proposal. While I dislike #500, I still remain unconvinced by the replacements. Will be voting for in game, but not here.
 

saintpeter

Justice
-
-
-
Against. This is an ideological argument dressed up with the window dressing of a repeal.
Of course it's an ideological argument; no-one is "[dressing] up" that it is one. Why exactly, though, is it a problem that a resolution in a legislative body makes an ideological argument? They're supposed to. In this case, opposition to state-mandated killing is a convincing ideological argument.
 

simone_republic

Citizen
-
For (non-WA). Judicial murder is a cruel and unusual punishment that must be universally abolished. Under no circumstances should we allow the continued existence of a punishment that is often torturous and amorally used in the name of revenge, not just

For (non-WA). Judicial murder is a cruel and unusual punishment that must be universally abolished. Under no circumstances should we allow the continued existence of a punishment that is often torturous and amorally used in the name of revenge, not justice.
Can I be Devil's advocate (literally) here (and paraphrasing the 88' debates, the question was asked by CNN's Bernard Shaw) and ask "if (your loved ones) were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"
 

Greater Cesnica

Registered
Can I be Devil's advocate (literally) here (and paraphrasing the 88' debates, the question was asked by CNN's Bernard Shaw) and ask "if (your loved ones) were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"
If my loved ones were raped and murdered, would I favor an irrevocable death penalty? In my heart of hearts, I would want to kill them myself. However, I believe that keeping them alive and denying them their freedom is ultimately the best form of justice. If I were to commit a heinous crime like murder, I would rather die than remain in a cell for the rest of my life. Now consider an innocent accused, tried, and convicted of such an atrocity (a man convicted of rape and murder was just freed a few days ago after his wrongful conviction was discovered, saving him from execution). The innocent person has a potential reprieve down the line if he is guaranteed to not be executed.
 

Comfed

Registered
-
-
-
Can I be Devil's advocate (literally) here (and paraphrasing the 88' debates, the question was asked by CNN's Bernard Shaw) and ask "if (your loved ones) were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"
Many death sentences were later found to be on innocent people. For many, it's too late, but we can always let people out of prison.
 
Top